Admin Order 58-96-26-F - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Finding: All construction activities that disturb land are affected by the program including the placement of building and landscape materials in the public right-of-way. Therefore, there is no need to adjust the rule. Comment 16: Why were the necessary materials needed for review, such as the manual, template, sensitive areas map not available for review? Finding: Most of these materials have been available for review since December 1995 and their availability has been announced publicly. Comment 17: Where does the program apply? Finding: Within the city limits of Eugene. Comment 18: Who is responsible for release of hazardous substances at a construction site. Finding: For activities requiring an erosion permit, the permittee (property owner or easement holer) is responsible for meeting the requirements of the program and permit. For non-permitted conditions, property owner or easement holder. Comment 19: The City Council should review the Administrative Rule prior to finalization. Finding: City Councilors were provided copies of the proposed rule and fee schedule for their review. Comment 20: Program will affect cost of homes. Finding: This issue was raised at the time the ordinance was considered. With most of the single family dwellings requiring a permit, costs to this group were considered minimized while benefits to water quality were raised. The ordinance was approved. This issue is out of the scope of the Administrative Rule. Therefore, there is no need for rule adjustments at this time. Comment 21: Blanket permits should be allowed for new subdivisions. Finding: The umbrella permit, R6.645-F3.2, provides this application. Therefore, there is no need to adjust the rule at this time. Comment 22: Stop work orders should only apply to the area of violation. Erosion Prevention Administrative Rule R-6.645 - 5